Case Summaries

International Law

[11/17] Manco Contracting Co. v. Bezdikian
In an action by a Qatari company seeking to domesticate its Qatari judgment against defendant, reversal of judgment against defendant is affirmed where: 1) if a foreign nation's rule is that judgments are final even though an appeal is pending, a judgment may be recognized in California despite an appeal; and 2) if the foreign nation's rule is that judgments are not final while an appeal is pending, a judgment on appeal cannot be recognized in California.

[11/12] Balachova v. Mukasey
Review of decision directing removal of husband and wife petitioners to Russia and denying asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture is dismissed in part, granted in part, and the order of removal is vacated where: 1) wife-petitioner's claims were dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies; 2) there were numerous errors in assessing husband-petitioner's applications for asylum and withholding of removal; 3) IJ's conclusion that husband-petitioner must have participated in the stated abuse because he equivocated the meaning of "rape" was not supported by substantial evidence; and 4) wife-petitioner may be eligible for derivative relief based on her husband's application.

[11/04] Emergency Coalition to Defend Educ. Travel v. U.S. Dep't of the Treasury
In a suit challenging the Office of Foreign Asset Control's amendments to regulations governing educational travel to Cuba, dismissal of all claims is affirmed where: 1) at least one plaintiff had standing to challenge the regulations, and there was therefore appellate jurisdiction; but 2) the travel restrictions were content-neutral and did not violate plaintiffs-professors' First Amendment rights; and 3) there was no violation of plaintiffs' Fifth Amendment right to travel internationally.

[11/04] Basardh v. Gates
In a Guantanamo Bay detainee's challenge to his detention, the government's motion to hold in abeyance detainee's petition for direct judicial review of the Combatant Status Review Tribunal's determination that he was an enemy combatant is granted where: 1) in light of the decision in Boumediene v. Bush, 128 S. Ct. 2229 (2008), petitioner's prior request for habeas corpus relief could be considered, potentially mooting the petition for direct review; and 2) there was a high probability that while restoring the availability of habeas relief, Boumediene simultaneously stripped the court of jurisdiction to review Detainee Treatment Act petitions.

[11/04] Stolt-Nielsen Transportation Group, Ltd. v. Animalfeeds Int'l Corp.
In litigation involving international maritime contracts that contained arbitration clauses, judgment vacating an arbitration award is reversed and remanded with instruction to deny petition to vacate where the arbitration panel, in construing an arbitration clause in an international maritime agreement to permit class arbitration when the clause was silent on that issue, did not manifestly disregard the law.

[10/28] U.S.O. Corp. v. Mizuho Holding Co.
In a suit alleging conversion of funds from the sale of a building, where all parties were companies having their principal places of business in Japan, dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds is affirmed where: 1) any presumption in favor of plaintiff's choice of forum was not a complete obstacle to dismissal; 2) the balance of burdens on plaintiffs and defendants weighed heavily in favor of dismissing the American suit and allowing an identical suit in a Japanese court to go forward; and 3) public interest considerations weighed toward allowing Japanese courts, rather than American ones, to try the cause.

[10/24] Chalabi v. Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan
In a suit alleging a civil RICO conspiracy and various torts related to Jordan's seizure of plaintiff's bank, dismissal of claims as time-barred is affirmed where: 1) consideration of the timeliness of the claims prior to the jurisdictional question of foreign sovereign immunity was proper; 2) plaintiff's claim accrued in 1989, outside the limitations period; and 3) plaintiff did not plead facts alleging that he was injured by a "continuing tort."

[10/23] US v. Fiander
In a contraband cigarette trafficking case, dismissal of a conviction for conspiracy to violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is reversed where: 1) under the Yakama Treaty of 1855 which secured Yakama tribe members the right to travel the public highways, Yakama members cannot be convicted for violating RICO or Washington state law forbidding traffic in contraband cigarettes; but 2) the government can state a claim against a Yakama member for violating RICO by alleging agreement to facilitate the underlying offense.

[10/17] Bebri v. Mukasey
Petition for review of decision denying Albanian-citizen petitioner's applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) is denied where: 1) the petitioner failed to renew the withholding of removal and CAT claims before the Board of Immigration Appeals; and 2) denial of asylum was supported by substantial evidence in the record.

[09/26] Chichakli v. Szubin
In an action challenging a "Blocking Notice" issued by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), summary judgment for defendants is affirmed in part and vacated in part where: 1) exigent circumstances justified the holding of a post-deprivation hearing after plaintiff's assets were frozen; 2) OFAC's determination that plaintiff was subject to a presidential order freezing his assets was neither arbitrary nor capricious; but 3) jurisdiction over plaintiff's taking claim was held exclusively by the Court of Federal Claims.

More...

Immigration Law

[11/18] Khunaverdiants v. Mukasey
Petition for review of the denial of an asylum application as time-barred is granted, and denial reversed, where: 1) appellate jurisdiction existed to review the BIA's determination that petitioner failed to establish a timely filing of his application, because it involved a question of law; and 2) the BIA erred in concluding that proof of an exact departure date was necessary when other clear and convincing evidence established that petitioner necessarily filed his asylum application less than one year after arriving in the United States.

[11/14] Alsol v. Mukasey
Petitions for review of decisions canceling removal are granted and orders of the Board of Immigration Appeals are vacated where: 1) a second conviction for simple controlled substance possession under state law is not a felony under the Controlled Substances Act, because the offense of conviction did not proscribe conduct punishable as a felony as it did not correspond in any meaningful way with the federal crime of recidivist possession, even if it could have been prosecuted in state court as a recidivist offense; and 2) the decision in US v. Simpson did not hold to the contrary.

[11/13] Kaba v. Mukasey
Petition for review of a denial of asylum and related relief brought by a native of the Cote d'Ivoire is denied where the evidence in the administrative record did not compel a conclusion contrary to those reached by the IJ in finding: 1) he was not credible; 2) he had not suffered past persecution in his native country; and 3) he failed to show a well-founded fear of future persecution there.

[11/12] US v. Alapizco-Valenzuela
A sentence for transporting illegal aliens for private financial gain is affirmed over defendant's challenges to: 1) the application of a two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. section 2L1.1(b)(8) for detaining an alien involuntarily through coercion or threat, or in connection with a demand for payment; and 2) a decision to grant a motion for an upward departure and upward variance.

[11/12] Balachova v. Mukasey
Review of decision directing removal of husband and wife petitioners to Russia and denying asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture is dismissed in part, granted in part, and the order of removal is vacated where: 1) wife-petitioner's claims were dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies; 2) there were numerous errors in assessing husband-petitioner's applications for asylum and withholding of removal; 3) IJ's conclusion that husband-petitioner must have participated in the stated abuse because he equivocated the meaning of "rape" was not supported by substantial evidence; and 4) wife-petitioner may be eligible for derivative relief based on her husband's application.

[11/10] Flores-Torres v. Mukasey
In a case involving a habeas petitioner held in immigration custody during his ongoing removal proceedings for over two years, dismissal for lack of jurisdiction of his habeas petition challenging his continued confinement is reversed and remanded for a determination as to whether he is a U.S. citizen and thus immune from detention under the INA, as section 1252 of the INA does not precludes the district court from exercising jurisdiction over the habeas petition.

[11/07] Wei v. Mukasey
In an asylum case involving a Chinese citizen, petition for review of a denial of her second motion to reopen is denied where: 1) the BIA did not abuse its discretion in determining that petitioner failed to present any new material evidence of changed country conditions; and 2) changed personal circumstances cannot support an untimely motion to reopen after a final order of removal.

[11/06] Santos-Sanchez v. US
In a case in which petitioner-resident alien, having pleaded guilty and served his sentence for aiding and abetting the illegal entry of an alien, sought to vacate his guilty plea in order to avoid removal in proceedings brought by DHS, denial of his petition for a writ of coram nobis is affirmed where: 1) jurisdiction to hear the petition was properly vested in the district court, not the magistrate judge who sentenced petitioner; 2) trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to advise petitioner that a guilty plea would automatically make him removable, nor did counsel affirmatively misrepresent the immigration consequences of his plea; and 3) the magistrate judge's failure to inform petitioner at his plea colloquy of the immigration consequences of a guilty plea did not make the plea involuntary.

[11/06] Mendez v. Mukasey
In an immigration appeal, petition for review of decision ordering petitioner's removal is denied where first degree larceny in the form of "defrauding a public community" is a crime involving moral turpitude.

[11/05] Mohammed v. U.S. Attorney Gen.
Petition for review of decision denying application for asylum and withholding of removal for Eritrean petitioner is denied where: 1) substantial evidence supported Immigration Judge's finding that petitioner failed to prove past persecution; and 2) substantial evidence supported the finding that petitioner did not have a well-founded fear of future persecution.

More...

Labor & Employment Law

[11/18] Stover v. Hattiesburg Pub. Sch. Dist.
In an employee's suit alleging race and sex discrimination, retaliation, and violation of the Equal Pay Act, judgment for defendant and denial of a new trial motion are affirmed where: 1) defendant was entitled to summary judgment on a constructive-discharge claim; 2) there was no reversible error in several challenged evidentiary rulings; 3) a "same actor" jury instruction was a correct statement of the law; and 4) there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict. Award of attorney's fees is reversed as the award was improperly calculated and defendant was not entitled to attorney's fees.

[11/18] Phillips v. Mathews
In a suit alleging interference and retaliation by a state-government employer in violation of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff had given proper notice to her employer that she required FMLA leave, but this disputed fact was not material since plaintiff did not produce sufficient evidence to demonstrate that her termination was related to her FMLA leave; and 2) plaintiff had exercised rights under FMLA sufficient to subsequently bring a retaliation claim when she was terminated, but defendant demonstrated that she had been terminated for non-FMLA reasons.

[11/17] Busseto Foods, Inc. v. Laizure
In a bankruptcy case in which debtor had embezzled and subsequently repaid funds from his employer, and employer had later been required to return those funds to the bankruptcy estate, dismissal of employer's complaint alleging that it had a nondischargeable claim against debtor is reversed where a creditor that is required to return to the trustee a payment from the debtor made within the ninety-day preference period still maintains a claim against the debtor for a nondischargeable claim.

[11/17] Seals v. General Motors Corp.
In an intentional tort claim action against defendant-employer General Motors for injuries suffered at defendant's metal stamping plant, grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed where the release form signed by plaintiff-employee barred plaintiff's claim as a matter of law.

[11/17] Alleyne v. American Airlines
Dismissal of discrimination claim brought pursuant to Title VII against defendant-employer is affirmed where plaintiff's claim of employment discrimination accrued for statute of limitations purposes on the date when plaintiff learned of his allegedly discriminatory loss of seniority, and not on the subsequent date of the neutral termination of his employment.

[11/14] Cook v. Avi Casino Enters., Inc.
In an action alleging negligence and dram shop liability seeking recovery for damages suffered as a result of a motor vehicle accident in which plaintiff, while on a motorcycle, was hit by a drunk driver who was an employee of defendant-tribal corporation, dismissal of plaintiffs' claims is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff established diversity jurisdiction over the case; but 2) dismissal was proper on grounds of tribal sovereign immunity as tribal immunity protects tribal employees acting in their official capacity and within the scope of their authority. For diversity purposes, a tribal corporation formed under tribal law is not a citizen of a state merely because its incorporation occurred inside that state.

[11/14] Montgomery v. Chao
In a suit alleging employment discrimination and retaliation by his government employer, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where no reasonable jury could conclude, based on plaintiff's evidence, that there was discrimination or retaliation in the employer's decisions not to promote plaintiff or name him to a new position.

[11/14] Ziskie v. Mineta
In a Title VII claim alleging that defendant-employer created a sexually hostile work environment and retaliated against plaintiff for asserting her rights, grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant Secretary of Transportation who administers plaintiff's former employer is affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part where there was a possibility that the district court did not appropriately consider the affidavits from plaintiff's co-workers, which were relevant to whether the plaintiff's work environment was hostile.

[11/14] In Re NEXT Fin. Group, Inc.
In a suit claiming that plaintiff was wrongfully discharged for refusing to conceal allegedly fraudulent securities transactions, petition for mandamus relief is granted where plaintiff was required to arbitrate a claim that his employer wrongfully discharged him for refusing to commit an illegal act.

[11/12] Pratt v. Union Pac. R.R. Co.
In a suit against defendant-employer brought under the Federal Employers' Liability Act and the Locomotive Inspection Act for personal injuries suffered at work, a court order prohibiting defendant-railroad company from compelling plaintiff-employee to attend a medical examination or conducting a disciplinary hearing to terminate plaintiff's employment for refusing to provide it with medical evidence justifying his continued absence from work is affirmed where: 1) the trial court had jurisdiction to prohibit extra-judicial discovery because the civil rules of discovery provide independent authority to grant a protective order for misuse of the discovery process; and 2) the trial court did not abuse its discretion by awarding monetary sanctions where the sanctions served not to punish but rather to encourage voluntary compliance with the discovery procedures.

More...